On 11/1/05, Wolfgang Gehner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > To me, 1.3 should be called 2.0.
The thinking has been that so long as each release is backwardly compatible with the last, then there is no reason to increment the major version number. A couple of things that might trigger incrementing the version number would be rewriting the code base to the latest JVM (rather than the one most people use). A "Struts Tiger" using Java 1.5 would be likely candidate for Struts 2.x. Another trigger might be a revolutionary change to the feature set. If we did everything that's already on the 1.3 to 1.5 roadmap, I could see going to 2.x then. But, as cool as 1.3 may be, it seems to be 100% backwardly compatible with 1.2 (once deprecations are removed). The change to the request processor is dramatic, but if you look back at what we did for 1.1 and 1.2, it's also evolutionary. > Everyone wonders if Struts is dying. I don't think it is. With 1.3/"1.5" > it gets a major push as far as extensibility is concerned (which should > be a key role of any <i>framework</i>. With tweaking the struts chains, > creating a "Struby" (Ruby on Struts) would probably be the work of a fun > long weekend. Talk about extending the life of Struts, here it is. If a Ruby on Struts is something that you want to use in your own work, then you should do it, and share the result with others. That's what we are doing here. :) If someone is concerned with Struts longevity, the most helpful thing might be to help us crank up the news and resources sections again. Once upon a time, we were *the* source for all things Struts. Every extension that came out, every article that was published, we announced them all here. But, when Struts peaked, it just became too much work to keep up with all the new announcements. We have a few things liisted in the resource directory, but the wiki pages we have now come no where close to exposing the extent of the Struts industry. * http://wiki.apache.org/struts/StrutsResources I wish I could work on this myself, but there's still much to do with the Struts 1.3 documentation, and I also want to get started on a Struts Use Case project. * http://opensource2.atlassian.com/confluence/oss/display/STRUTS/Struts+Classic > Marketing uses "Classic" when they want to discourage people using it, > and rather buy something new. Ah, well, we're not marketers and we're not selling anything. We're a group of engineers working together to create and maintain the framework that we want to use in our own applications. I don't think anyone is married to the term "Classic", it's just that no one's suggested another. > Also, would anyone want to step forward and be vocal about what is new > with Struts 1.3 ("1.5") in discussions like > http://www.theserverside.com/news/thread.tss?thread_id=37365 ? I tend to stay away from the ServerSide chats, but I did post a comment to write in a +1 for Struts to the (somewhat silly) About.com survey. * http://forums.about.com/n/pfx/forum.aspx?nav=messages&tsn=1&tid=1584&webtag=ab-java -- HTH, Ted. http://www.husted.com/poe/ --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
